Katelyn Baker
Well-Known Member
I've got to take issue with Julio Menocal's June 25 commentary on marijuana legalization. "An ounce of prevention ...":
First, with more than 5,000 years of reported cannabis use (the oldest references are Chinese), there are no reported deaths from using cannabis.
Even with more people consuming it in the form of "edibles," which potentially have a much stronger, longer-lasting effect, the chances of death caused by an "overdose" of THC, the active ingredient in cannabis, are tremendously slim. To be fair, I have heard of someone having a heart attack from eating a potent edible, but we know this issue would have already been present and would kill this person.
Now the mention of genetic manipulation. Yes, there has been a lot of selective breeding to bring out certain desirable traits (smell, size, color, potency, etc), but what has not been done is taking out or adding specific genes in a lab to bring about these changes in the plants' growth cycle. So, yes, there have been "genetic changes," but again, we're talking about selective breeding (we did the exact same thing with dogs over the eons), not willy-nilly genetic modification in a lab as it's defined in our society.
Next is the idea of the "super potent strain." Yes, there are very potent cannabis strains out there, but here are some things to consider. The claim that average THC levels from the late 1960s and early '70s are around 2.5 percent is spurious at best. If I recall this correctly (short-term memory isn't serving me well here), the Drug Enforcement Administration's own tests of confiscated cannabis show average THC potency at more than twice that percentage. Ask anyone who smoked cannabis in the '60s and '70s, and most will say they smoked pot that was every bit as potent as what's available today.
What has happened is that there is more high-quality (potent) cannabis available to consumers than the so-called "low THC strains" from 30 to 40 years ago. There are strains available that test with more than 25 percent THC, and concentrates (hash and hash oil) that are up to 80 percent. What is missing from the argument of higher THC levels is that cannabis consumers stop consuming once they've reached the level of intoxication they want – this goes for smoking actual plant material, as well as use of THC concentrates. So smoking more potent pot and concentrates means that you are taking less smoke into your lungs, which any rational person knows is nowhere near as damaging.
But the idea that legalization is going to unleash a high level of death in consumers is preposterous. Again, after more than 5,000 years of "research" being done by humans, there have been NO DEATHS from consuming too much THC.
Anyone who has consumed "too much" cannabis/THC will tell you that the only thing that happens is you end up going to sleep - and NOT dying. The only ways cannabis could kill you would be for someone to take a 50-pound bale of marijuana and drop it on your head, or maybe beat you to death with it, or put a person and that 50-pound bale into a small closet and light the bale on fire.
As with anything we consume in this country (high-sugar/high-fat food, fossil fuels, the millions of cancer-causing chemicals in our lives) there are potential downsides. Yes, smoking anything isn't good for you, but the "one joint is the same as a pack of cigarettes" idea is a bit ridiculous. First, no one could smoke 20 joints of so-called super-pot in a day - you'd smoke yourself to sleep. Second, there haven't been any studies into just how much "bad stuff" is in cannabis smoke, so Dr. Menocal is correct in saying there needs to be much more research into all aspects of cannabis.
What legalization will bring will be more people using cannabis in much safer ways. Vaporization, or vaporizing only the THC and not combustion of the plant material, is much less damaging to the body. There'll be more people consuming THC in food and drinks, which is even less damaging to the body. To be sure, there are lessons to be learned from more research, but we already have 40 years of "research" by relatively large percentages of the world's population, than in the previous 4,960 years, so we already know quite a bit about potential negative side effects - and death is not one of them.
Anyone of legal age can purchase enough alcohol to kill every person they know from alcohol poisoning. Nicotine in sufficient doses will poison and kill you. We can (and do) consume sugary, salty and fatty foods, giving us the various diseases (and killing tens of thousands every year) related to what's been called the "American diet." But with all of the evidence we have from millennia of use, THC will very likely NEVER kill a human.
News Moderator: Katelyn Baker 420 MAGAZINE ®
Full Article: Marijuana Commentary Missed Mark
Author: J. Keith Buppert
Contact: 301-662-1177
Photo Credit: Brennen Linsley
Website: The Frederick News-Post
First, with more than 5,000 years of reported cannabis use (the oldest references are Chinese), there are no reported deaths from using cannabis.
Even with more people consuming it in the form of "edibles," which potentially have a much stronger, longer-lasting effect, the chances of death caused by an "overdose" of THC, the active ingredient in cannabis, are tremendously slim. To be fair, I have heard of someone having a heart attack from eating a potent edible, but we know this issue would have already been present and would kill this person.
Now the mention of genetic manipulation. Yes, there has been a lot of selective breeding to bring out certain desirable traits (smell, size, color, potency, etc), but what has not been done is taking out or adding specific genes in a lab to bring about these changes in the plants' growth cycle. So, yes, there have been "genetic changes," but again, we're talking about selective breeding (we did the exact same thing with dogs over the eons), not willy-nilly genetic modification in a lab as it's defined in our society.
Next is the idea of the "super potent strain." Yes, there are very potent cannabis strains out there, but here are some things to consider. The claim that average THC levels from the late 1960s and early '70s are around 2.5 percent is spurious at best. If I recall this correctly (short-term memory isn't serving me well here), the Drug Enforcement Administration's own tests of confiscated cannabis show average THC potency at more than twice that percentage. Ask anyone who smoked cannabis in the '60s and '70s, and most will say they smoked pot that was every bit as potent as what's available today.
What has happened is that there is more high-quality (potent) cannabis available to consumers than the so-called "low THC strains" from 30 to 40 years ago. There are strains available that test with more than 25 percent THC, and concentrates (hash and hash oil) that are up to 80 percent. What is missing from the argument of higher THC levels is that cannabis consumers stop consuming once they've reached the level of intoxication they want – this goes for smoking actual plant material, as well as use of THC concentrates. So smoking more potent pot and concentrates means that you are taking less smoke into your lungs, which any rational person knows is nowhere near as damaging.
But the idea that legalization is going to unleash a high level of death in consumers is preposterous. Again, after more than 5,000 years of "research" being done by humans, there have been NO DEATHS from consuming too much THC.
Anyone who has consumed "too much" cannabis/THC will tell you that the only thing that happens is you end up going to sleep - and NOT dying. The only ways cannabis could kill you would be for someone to take a 50-pound bale of marijuana and drop it on your head, or maybe beat you to death with it, or put a person and that 50-pound bale into a small closet and light the bale on fire.
As with anything we consume in this country (high-sugar/high-fat food, fossil fuels, the millions of cancer-causing chemicals in our lives) there are potential downsides. Yes, smoking anything isn't good for you, but the "one joint is the same as a pack of cigarettes" idea is a bit ridiculous. First, no one could smoke 20 joints of so-called super-pot in a day - you'd smoke yourself to sleep. Second, there haven't been any studies into just how much "bad stuff" is in cannabis smoke, so Dr. Menocal is correct in saying there needs to be much more research into all aspects of cannabis.
What legalization will bring will be more people using cannabis in much safer ways. Vaporization, or vaporizing only the THC and not combustion of the plant material, is much less damaging to the body. There'll be more people consuming THC in food and drinks, which is even less damaging to the body. To be sure, there are lessons to be learned from more research, but we already have 40 years of "research" by relatively large percentages of the world's population, than in the previous 4,960 years, so we already know quite a bit about potential negative side effects - and death is not one of them.
Anyone of legal age can purchase enough alcohol to kill every person they know from alcohol poisoning. Nicotine in sufficient doses will poison and kill you. We can (and do) consume sugary, salty and fatty foods, giving us the various diseases (and killing tens of thousands every year) related to what's been called the "American diet." But with all of the evidence we have from millennia of use, THC will very likely NEVER kill a human.
News Moderator: Katelyn Baker 420 MAGAZINE ®
Full Article: Marijuana Commentary Missed Mark
Author: J. Keith Buppert
Contact: 301-662-1177
Photo Credit: Brennen Linsley
Website: The Frederick News-Post